The proposal, which would double the linkage fee -- officially the "housing impact fee" -- charged to commercial builders, is scheduled for debate before a City Council committee Thursday with action expected by the full council by early August.

The current fees raise about $2.2 million annually to cover the costs of building new affordable housing units at an average cost of about $100,000, not counting other funding sources. The increases would raise the total collections to about $3.6 million, enough to build 36 units annually, up from 22.

The increases would not apply to research-and-development developments and all linkage fees would be eliminated for manufacturing facilities, warehouses and nonprofit hospitals.

For a typical office building, the fee would rise from the present $1.06 per square foot to $2.12. The rate for retail stores and hotels would go from 64 cents to $1.28 per square foot. It's not clear if all industrial buildings would be exempted, since some operate as flex spaces with both office and industrial/warehouse/manufacturing uses. The current "manufactring/industrial" fee is 64 cents per square foot.

Fee proponents say commercial development has some role in creating housing demand among low- and moderate-income households -- hence the catchword "linkage" fee for short.

Critics say commercial development isn't responsible for creating housing demand but only responds to market conditions for nonresidential uses and that other sources should be tapped to develop affordable housing.

Document

Andrea Tevlin, the budget analyst, and her research analyst, Nicole Dangermond, said in their four-page report that the plan, worked out by the San Diego Housing Commission and Jobs Coalition of business groups, falls short because:

The fee has no built-in escalation clause to reflect rising costs of construction and other factors.

It is proposed to double to its 1990 level but could drop to its current rate in 2018 if certain milestones -- deemed "unclear" -- are not met. The fees were cut in half in 1996 during a recession in which development sagged and never increased once the economy recovered.

The council and commission's freedom to make changes would be restricted.

"We understand this is a compromise and that it has been extremely difficult to find common ground," the authors said. "Nevertheless, we feel that this proposal creates greater uncertainty for the future of housing impact fees and does not make sufficient progress in the effort to return to original 1990 fee levels in exchange for commitments to pursue numerous regulatory and cost reductions for the development community."

The linkage fee plan grew out of a referendum that the business community successfully mounted after the council approved new fees late last year that were as much as five times their present rate. The council rescinded the increases rather than place the measure before the voters and instructed the commission to return with a new plan.

A new ordinance cannot be passed for at least a year unless it is substantially different from the earlier measure -- a judgment that will require the city attorney's determination.